Is Saddam Hussein bankrolling terror to save himself from a U.S. invasion?

[amadeus]

Honestly, I say, he is.

He's paying these suicide bombers simply to divert the United States away from Iraq and into Israel.

Sadly, he succeeded.

 

[andycapp]

I'd suggest that a more likely motive is Saddam wants to rebuild his credibility amongst other Arab/Muslim Governments and peoples. By providing blood money to the families of suicide bombers he gains leverage with the various terrorist groups involved in the Palestinian 'struggle'.

Of course by getting his fellow Muslims and Arabs on-side he strengthens his military and diplomatic position against the possibility of US/Western attack.

Is that what you were getting at Sharpie?

 

[G-Man]

I think he ment that the US doesn't wanna attack Saddam before ending the intifada.

 

[Hitro]

I agree with andycapp that his motives are probably not only connected with a possible US/Western attack. He is also very interested in gaining influence in the arab world again and actions like that already made him quite popular amoung the "ordinary" people for a example among the Palestinians.

 

[Franklyn]

i think you're giving ol' saddam too much credit. the U.S. has plenty of reasons for not wanting to attack Iraq at this point. Tops among them is not wanting to piss off the Arab world, which is something that contributed indirectly to 9/11.

 

[IceBlaZe]

Originally posted by Franklyn
i think you're giving ol' saddam too much credit. the U.S. has plenty of reasons for not wanting to attack Iraq at this point. Tops among them is not wanting to piss off the Arab world, which is something that contributed indirectly to 9/11.

It had nothing to do with 9/11.
The only thing that contributed the 9/11 is the big hug the arab world gives to terrorists who hurt their enemies, moral enemies, actual enemies and cultural enemies.

 

[Franklyn]

Supposedly, Osama was hacked off at the U.S. for stationing troops in Saudi Arabia during the U.S. invasion of Iraq in the early '90s. Some think that's Osama's motivation for carrying out terror attacks against the WTC in '93, US embassies after that and, ultimately, 9/11.

I have no doubt (from what I've read, anyway) that Saddam is backing terrorist activities in Israel. I think it has less to do w/ forestalling a second US invasion and more to do w/ supporting Arab claims to territory in the Middle East.

 

[G-Man]

"supporting Arab claims to territory in the Middle East"

I thought the arabs already had some territory in the middle east . Iraq supports terrorism like any arab country (with the exception of Jordan and Egypt) it wants to destroy Israel but isn't strong enough to do it militarily so they're using terrorism. Saddam supported terrorists since he got to power. Delaying the US attack is just a bonus.

 

[Greadius]

Originally posted by Franklyn
Tops among them is not wanting to piss off the Arab world, which is something that contributed indirectly to 9/11.

Funny how the Arab world doesn't seem all that concerned to piss of the U.S. A little bit of a double standard, 'eh? They can call us the great Satan and its cultural differences, I call them ragheads and I'm being a racist

Originally posted by Franklyn
Supposedly, Osama was hacked off at the U.S. for stationing troops in Saudi Arabia during the U.S. invasion of Iraq in the early '90s. Some think that's Osama's motivation for carrying out terror attacks against the WTC in '93, US embassies after that and, ultimately, 9/11.

Yeah? I don't like American troops being stationed there either... see me kill anyone over it? Only because he 'feels' that way doesn't mean he is right, it doesn't mean he is justified, and it doesn't mean I should care.

Originally posted by Franklyn
I think it has less to do w/ forestalling a second US invasion and more to do w/ supporting Arab claims to territory in the Middle East.

Interesting how Saddam didn't make a public speech about anything related to Israel until American forces were massing at his border a decade ago. After being in charge of Iraq for 13 years, and making it one of the wealthiest nations in the Middle East, his back was against the wall and he suddenly had an epiphany and empathized with Palestinian struggle. Then launched missiles into Tel Aviv.
Now all of a sudden, faced with a similar situation, he finds his heart to care for the Palestinians again.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Greadius
Funny how the Arab world doesn't seem all that concerned to piss of the U.S. A little bit of a double standard, 'eh? They can call us the great Satan and its cultural differences, I call them ragheads and I'm being a racist

Muslim fundamentalists call the US the great Satan, not "the Arab world". I haven't heard Jordan's king say that for example.

Only because he 'feels' that way doesn't mean he is right, it doesn't mean he is justified, and it doesn't mean I should care.

No matter if he's justified or not, you should still care. It's a reason for action from his point of view. A reason stays a reason whether justified or not.

 

[IceBlaZe]

Originally posted by Hitro

Muslim fundamentalists call the US the great Satan, not "the Arab world". I haven't heard Jordan's king say that for example.

>>> Actually it is the arab world. With a few exceptions.

No matter if he's justified or not, you should still care. It's a reason for action from his point of view. A reason stays a reason whether justified or not.

>>> There is a big difference between a reason to an escuse. Islamic Fundementalist terror like the one ran by OBL is not valid to the causal relations theory. A reason is something that if you eliminate it the outcome will cease from existing, but wether if you like it or not islamic terror existed before OBL and before his complaints about us presence in holy islamic land.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
There is a big difference between a reason to an escuse. Islamic Fundementalist terror like the one ran by OBL is not valid to the causal relations theory. A reason is something that if you eliminate it the outcome will cease from existing, but wether if you like it or not islamic terror existed before OBL and before his complaints about us presence in holy islamic land.

That was actually my point.
An excuse is nothing else but an invalid reason. But the US has to care about it no matter whether it's a reason or an excuse, because it leads or may lead to action against the US. Not caring about it just because it is invalid wouldn't be smart. That's all I wanted to say.

 

[Franklyn]

Originally posted by Greadius
Yeah? I don't like American troops being stationed there either... see me kill anyone over it? Only because he 'feels' that way doesn't mean he is right, it doesn't mean he is justified, and it doesn't mean I should care.

I agree with you there, brother -- I'm not too keen either on having U.S. troops posted in the Middle East. And I never said Osama was right or justified in using the U.S. presence in the Middle East to use terror vs. the U.S. That was part of his reasoning, as loony as it is.

The U.S. has plenty of reasons not to go after Iraq right now, and the Israeli-Palestinian fight isn't the reason. The biggest: oil prices, which would likely spike if there was an Iraqi-U.S. war, something that would short-circuit the economic recovery.

 

[IceBlaZe]

Oil prices won't spike that bad unless it turns to a regional war, which it won't.

 

[CurtSibling]

There is a common mistake the westerners make about Iraq.

Saddam is only interested in maintaining his power and position.
It is the most important thing to him, and he will act according to
Whatever method keeps him in power.

He is not like Hitler or Stalin; he's in a minor league.

Conquest is not on Saddam's agenda; neither is destroying the US,
Only power, pure and simple.

Andycapp's opinion about Saddam buying reputation with the terror-groups
Does hold some feasibility.

You have to understand the tyrant's motives.
This is not Hollywood.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by CurtSibling
Conquest is not on Saddam's agenda

What was Kuwait?

 

[IceBlaZe]

He massacred thousands (or millions?) of kurds and he killed thousands of his own people.
His attempts on getting a nuclear weapon and long-range missiles strengthen by the day.
He calls for the end of USA and Israel.
He DOES support terror against citizens.
Any reason why we should keep him alive / wait for him to strike first?

do you know what england and france thought about hitler?
just what you are thinking about saddam right now...
they said he wont get elected for pm.
and then, when he did, they said he aint crazy enough to open a war.
When he did, they gave him all the land he wanted without war, untill poland.
And then it was too late.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by NY Hoya


What was Kuwait?

An attempt to exorcise the failure of his war against Iran.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by CurtSibling


An attempt to exorcise the failure of his war against Iran.

and I suppose after he conquered the Kuwaiti people and exorcised those demons he was going to pack up and leave? After all, he just wanted to prove to himself that he was still powerful...

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
He massacred thousands (or millions?) of kurds and he killed
do you know what england and france thought about hitler
just what you are thinking about saddam right now...
they said he wont get elected for pm.
and then, when he did, they said he aint crazy enough to open a war.
When he did, they gave him all the land he wanted without war, untill poland.
And then it was too late.

I come from a town that was ruined by Hitler's Luftwaffe,
you have no need to tell me about WW2, Iceblaze.

The difference between Saddam and Hilter is that Germany had
the finest army in the world in 1940-42.

Hitler had at his command a European superpower using the very best hardware and tactics.
That is why every nation was uneager to go to war with him.
Who would pick a world war with the USA nowadays?
Same power level...

Saddam, on the hand, has a large force but it is deplorably trained,
the hardware is second-rate and crewed by men who lack
motivation and knowledge to use the weapons.
The so-called elite Baathist-guard are cannon-fodder to a real army,
such as those fielded by the USA, UK and Europe.

So kindly do not use faulty historical reference,
I know more about WW2 military than you could imagine.
This 2002 not 1940.

Saddam is a different animal, what is he going to do?
Invade Israel and Europe?
The Israeli army would annihilate the Iraqi rabble.
As if the Iraqi troops would obey an order to attack anyway...



PS
I agree Saddam must die, but the Iraqi people have suffered enough,
they just want to be released from dictatorship...